Department for Energy and Climate Change

Levy Control Framework

Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth: My Right Honourable Friend the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change is today announcing a package of reforms to take control of the costs of renewable electricity subsidies under the Levy Control Framework (LCF). This is part of the Government’s commitment to control energy bills for hard-working British families and businesses as we continue to move to a low carbon economy and make progress toward our carbon reduction and renewable energy targets. The Department of Energy and Climate Change’s latest forecasts under the Levy Control Framework to 2020/21, confirmed in the Office of Budgetary Responsibility’s (OBR) report ‘Economic and Fiscal Outlook – July 2015’[1], have shown that forecast spend on renewable energy subsidy schemes is set to be higher than expected when the schemes under the LCF were established. The Government has set a limit of £7.6bn in 2020-2021 (in 2011/12 prices), so the current forecast is £1.5bn above that limit. This is due to accelerated developments in technological efficiency, higher than expected uptake of demand-led schemes and changes in wholesale prices. This means that the forecast of future spend under the LCF is now estimated at around £11.4bn (in nominal prices) or £9.1bn (in 2011/12 prices) in 2020/21. The Government is determined to bring these costs under control to protect consumers and provide a basis for investment in clean electricity in future. It is important therefore to control spending under the demand-led schemes in order to deliver renewable electricity at competitive prices. As part of this the Government has recently announced its intention to end new subsidies for onshore wind and to close the Renewables Obligation to new onshore wind in Great Britain from 1 April 2016. Today the Government is announcing further measures to control costs under the demand-led schemes managed under the LCF. These measures indicate our move away from demand-led schemes while providing appropriate protection for existing investments. Changes to grandfathering provisions for biomass co-firing and conversion plant under the Renewables Obligation (RO) Following consultation and a careful review of the evidence and opinions, the Government’s assessment is that unless grandfathering is withdrawn as proposed in the consultation there is strong likelihood that additional biomass conversion units not previously accounted for in RO budgets would convert under the RO. This could result in a potential additional cost of around £500m per annum in 2020/21 (2011/12 prices). The Government is therefore taking action to ensure that the support rate under the RO for future biomass co-firing and conversion projects in England and Wales will no longer be covered by grandfathering[2]. Exceptions will be provided to protect those who have already made significant financial commitments. Further detail can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/changes-to-grandfathering-policy-with-respect-to-future-biomass-co-firing-and-conversion-projects-in-the-renewables-obligation Consulting on controlling spending on support for solar PV electricity generating stations of 5MW and below within the RO DECC’s latest analysis indicates that solar PV deployment under the RO is likely to be significantly greater than previously anticipated. Evidence has also grown that the costs to developers associated with the deployment of solar PV have dropped significantly in the last few years. This suggests that some solar projects are receiving more support under the RO than is necessary for them to deploy. As part of wider action to control costs, the Government is therefore proposing to take action to further constrain the costs of solar PV under the RO. The RO scheme will be closing to all technologies at the end of March 2017. However, in view of the evidence above the Government proposes to close the RO early to new solar projects of 5MW and below from 1 April 2016, providing grace periods to protect developers that have preliminary accreditation, those who have made a significant financial investment[3] as of the date of the publication of the consultation and those affected by grid delays outside of their control. In addition, to avoid potential overcompensation of further solar deployment before the early closure, the Government proposes to remove grandfathering for solar PV projects that are not accredited under the RO as of the date of this consultation, with an exception for developers that have made a significant financial investment as of the date of the publication of the consultation. Subject to the proposed consultation, the Government also intends to publish proposed bandings for new solar PV projects of 5MW and below for consultation. Further detail can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/Changes-to-financial-support-for-solar-PV. Consulting on changes to the preliminary accreditation rules under the Feed-in Tariff (FIT) scheme, followed by a wider review of the scheme to drive significant further savings The FIT scheme was introduced in April 2010 to support sub-5MW solar, onshore wind, anaerobic digestion and hydro projects. Pre-accreditation was introduced in order to allow installations above 50kw to lock in their tariff level. Now that the sector has demonstrated its ability to deploy at scale, the Government believes that it is appropriate to look to transfer that risk back to industry. This could reduce future LCF spending pressure and reduce, but not eliminate, the risk of increases in deployment triggered by any future tariff degressions. Further detail can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/Changes-to-Feed-in-Tariff-accreditation. The Government will also consult on further cost control measures as part of the wider FITs Review later in the summer. LCF budget post-2020 The Government remains committed to renewal of our ageing energy infrastructure, maintaining a secure energy supply, and meeting our environmental commitments as cost-effectively as possible. The announcements that the Government is making today provide the basis for a more sustainable approach to future low-carbon electricity investment. The Government will therefore set out totals for the Levy Control Framework beyond 2020, providing a basis for electricity investment into the next decade, and in the autumn the Government will set out its plans in respect of the next CFD allocation round.  [1] Table 4.5 Current Receipts on page 98 sets out the cost of Environmental Levies and can be found at http://cdn.budgetresponsibility.independent.gov.uk/July-2015-EFO-234224.pdf.Table 2.7 Environmental Levies providing the breakdown of spend on the RO, FIT and CFD can be found at http://cdn.budget responsibility.independent.gov.uk/fiscal_supplementary_tables_2015 Figures are nominal.[2] Grandfathering is a policy that once a generating station is accredited and receiving RO support at a certain level, the level would not change for the lifetime of its support under that scheme[3] To demonstrate a significant financial investment it is proposed that developers will have to provide evidence of a planning application, a grid connection agreement and land rights

Ministry of Justice

HM Courts and Tribunals Service

Lord Faulks: I am today announcing the Government’s Response to the consultation on proposals for increases to court fees, which was published on 16 January 2015, and also launching a new consultation on further proposals.The courts fulfil a vital role in an effective and functioning democracy. They provide access to justice for those who need it, upholding the principle of the rule of law. That is why we need to make sure that the courts and tribunals are properly funded.The Secretary of State and the Courts Minister have set out separately plans for reform to the courts and tribunals where we will be investing in reforms that will deliver a modernised, leaner, and more efficient system.To deliver this vision, we need a strong, secure and effective economy. This Government was elected to continue our work to fix the economy, by reducing public spending, eliminating the deficit and reducing the national debt. The courts and tribunals must continue to play their part in this national effort as much as any other public service.There is, however, only so much that can be delivered through efficiency measures alone. If we are to secure sustainable funding of the courts and tribunals, we must also look to those who use the system to contribute more where they can afford to do so.That is why we have to look again at court fees. Despite the fees already introduced, HMCTS still costs £1 billion a year more to run than it receives in income. In considering the changes outlined below, we have been determined to:· deliver faster and fairer justice for all;· protect the weak and vulnerable;· promote equality of all before the law.Following a consultation launched by the Coalition Government in January 2015, today’s Government Response confirms that we will:· Increase the fees for issuing a possession claim in the county court by £75, from £280 to £355. Our analysis of the available evidence suggests that this increase will not deter anyone who would otherwise have taken their claim to court.· Increase the fees for general applications in civil proceedings by £50, from £50 to £100, for an application by consent and by £100, from £155 to £255, for a contested application. In order to ensure the most vulnerable are not affected, we are excluding from this fee rise applications such as those to vary or extend an injunction for protection from harassment or violence.In December 2013, the Coalition Government also consulted on increasing the fee payable to issue divorce proceedings from £410 to £750. Today we are announcing that we will:· Increase the fees for issuing divorce proceedings to £550. We have carefully considered the concerns raised during the consultation and decided not to increase fees by 80% as originally proposed. Instead we will press ahead with a more affordable increase of about a third. We are also protecting the most vulnerable by ensuring that fee remission is available for those who need it, such as women in low wage households.These three measures are estimated to deliver over £60million in additional income each year but the drive to reduce costs is ongoing. We are therefore also announcing today a consultation on further proposals:· An increase in the maximum fee for money claims from £10,000 to at least £20,000. Fees are currently payable on 5% of the value of a claim up to a maximum fee of £10,000. This change will only affect the highest value claims, worth £200,000 or more. There are 1.2 million money claims each year, of which 5,000 will be affected. That is just 0.4% of the total, or 1 in every 240 money claims. Many of the claims brought for higher values will involve large multi-national organisations or wealthy individuals, and we believe it is right to ask them to contribute more. In order to protect the most vulnerable, personal injury and clinical negligence claims will be excluded from this higher cap and fee remissions for those of limited means will continue to apply.· Introducing or increasing fees for certain tribunals. We are proposing to double fees in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber, while applying exemptions to protect the most vulnerable. We will not be applying any fees to the Social Entitlement Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal, where most applicants do not have the means to pay, or to the Mental Health Tribunal, which deals with especially vulnerable individuals. We will, however, introduce fees to the property, tax and general regulatory chambers. In the property tribunal, we are proposing fees at low levels for the majority of applications, while setting higher fees for leasehold enfranchisement cases where there are often large sums of money at stake. In each of the tribunals being consulted on, we aim to recover 25% of the total cost of the service through fees with taxpayers footing the rest of the bill.· A general uplift of 10% to a wide range of fees in civil proceedings. These are small increases and only apply to fees which are not already above full cost.These further proposals are estimated to generate around £48million a year in additional income.We are committed to protecting access to justice for all and so we will:· Make the remissions scheme more generous. We will increase the amount of disposable capital those who need to pay a larger court fee are allowed to have in order to qualify for remission. We are also considering whether other forms of payment or benefit should be excluded from the disposable capital test. The HMCTS remission scheme will apply across all the courts and tribunals on which we are consulting, with the exception of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber where separate arrangements are in place.Full details are set out in the consultation paper which is available on the MoJ website. The consultation will close on 15 September.We recognise that fee increases are not popular but they are necessary if we are to deliver our promises to fix the economy and bring the nation into surplus. At every stage we have sought to protect the most vulnerable by ensuring they will not have to pay new and higher fees and by making the remissions scheme more generous. We have also sought to ensure that those who can afford to – such as wealthy individuals or large corporations making very high money claims – will make a bigger contribution. Every pound we collect from these fee increases will be spent on providing an efficient and effective system of courts and tribunals.

Department for Communities and Local Government

National Planning Policy Framework: technical adjustment

Baroness Williams of Trafford: Following a recent High Court judgement (Wenman v Secretary of State), we are today making a technical adjustment to paragraphs 49 and 159 of the National Planning Policy Framework.   Paragraph 49From today, those persons who fall within the definition of ‘traveller’ under the Planning Policy for Traveller Sites, cannot rely on the lack of a five year supply of deliverable housing sites under the National Planning Policy Framework to show that relevant policies for the supply of housing are not up to date. Such persons should have the lack of a five year supply of deliverable traveller sites considered in accordance with Planning Policy for Traveller Sites.   Paragraph 159 Planning Policy for Traveller Sites sets out how ‘travellers’ (as defined in Annex A of that document) accommodation needs should also be assessed. Those who do not fall under that definition should have their accommodation needs addressed under the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework.   This does not form part of the changes to planning policy for travellers, on which the Government consulted in 2014, and to which this Government intends to respond shortly.

Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

Government response to consultation on alternative providers of higher education

Baroness Neville-Rolfe: My hon Friend the Minister of State for Universities and Science (Jo Johnson) is publishing today the Government’s response to our consultation on improving quality and value for money at alternative providers of higher education.   The Government has considered the responses to the consultation and will now implement the policies that were consulted on. These measures will strengthen the English language requirements at alternative providers, give better information to prospective students and link student number controls to the performance of the provider.   From the 2016/17 academic year alternative providers of higher education will: 1. Have to ensure their students have a proficiency of English Language skills assessed at minimum international level B2 (equivalent to 5.5-6.5 on the IELTS scale) or equivalent upon starting the course 2. Be required to provide prospective students with better information through the Key Information Set 3. Have their student number controls linked to their performance, with the best performers eligible for higher allocations   These changes will help build confidence, transparency and accountability in the alternative provider sector. They will incentivise high quality provision and allow the best providers to grow while further tackling poor provision and poor practice.   The response document will be made available on the gov.uk website. Copies of the response have been made available in the libraries of both Houses.